|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sold
by simon8201 - 09/09/26 01:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wales
by Joske Vermeule, September 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums39
Topics49,896
Posts837,997
Members9,635
| |
Most Online1,063
Jun 14th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12
Talk Morgan Regular
|
OP
Talk Morgan Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12 |
The Ecoboost 2.0 would make a Plus 4 worth its Plus several times. Harald
Harald
+4 4-seater 2008 Squadron Blue
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 142
L - Learner Plates On
|
|
L - Learner Plates On
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 142 |
Having fabricated many turbo setups on various cars and swapped X engine into X car a ton, I've always toyed around in the back of my mind with fabbing up a turbocharging system for the plus 4.
That said, I think part of the feel of driving the Morgan is the more "old school" power it has which I think turbo lag would upset.
Last edited by Read T; 07/05/13 07:59 PM.
1960 Morgan +4 4 seater
1997 Nissan 240sx S14
2011 Nissan 370Z
2009 Triumph Street Triple
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,749 Likes: 158
Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,749 Likes: 158 |
I can't help thinking a small supercharger woul be better than turbo charging.
Peter ![[Linked Image]](http://bradley.it/public_images/drive.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 105
L - Learner Plates On
|
|
L - Learner Plates On
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 105 |
Got to agree with that, a supercharger would suit the Plus 4 power characteristics better.
Morgan 4/4 2004
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12
Talk Morgan Regular
|
|
OP
Talk Morgan Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12 |
Look at this impressive torque curve compared to the Ford 3.0 V6:  Harald
Harald
+4 4-seater 2008 Squadron Blue
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28,909 Likes: 354
Salty Sea Dog Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Salty Sea Dog Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28,909 Likes: 354 |
Is that the 2.0l EcoBoost motor torque curve?
Impressive!
Graham (G4FUJ)
Sold L44FOR 4/4 Giallo Fly
'11 MINI Countryman Cooper D All4
'90 LR 90 SW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 38
Just Getting Started
|
|
Just Getting Started
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 38 |
To drive to 2.0 litre Ecoboost engine you would be very hard pushed to feel and perceptible "turbo lag". It feels like a larger displacement engine and throttle response is very linear. It really would make an excellent engine for a Mog. However it would encroach into the performance envelope of the 3.7, albeit without the lovely noise. Please note, I was not involved in the development of either the 2.0 Ecoboost or the 3.7 V6 in any way at all, honest 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 367 Likes: 1
Learner Plates Off!
|
|
Learner Plates Off!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 367 Likes: 1 |
You don't live anywhere near Dunton by chance?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12
Talk Morgan Regular
|
|
OP
Talk Morgan Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 655 Likes: 12 |
Yes, according to Ford this is the 2.0 torque curve. If the 1.0 version works in a Caterham Seven 1.0 Ecoboost, a Morgan +4 2.0 Ecoboost would be twice as good.  Harald
Harald
+4 4-seater 2008 Squadron Blue
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 38
Just Getting Started
|
|
Just Getting Started
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 38 |
Andy. I may or may not live somewhere in the Essex area. But I can neither confirm nor deny this The problem with the 1.0 is the sheer height of the engine block and head. The caterham install has a custom Dry sump but still adversley affects the COG and roll centres of the car. More work needed. Incidentally, Radical use the 2.0 turned up to 330 BHP with no ill effects on reliability  You wouldn't believe the hours or POWERZ that have been seen on test rigs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
